Creating a spring using only beams

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the modeling of a spring using cantilever beams in ANSYS, focusing on the relationship between beam dimensions, applied forces, and resulting deflections. Participants explore the mechanics of the system, including the effects of beam length and the nature of forces acting on the structure.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that increasing the length of the connecting section reduces total deflection, seeking an explanation for this observation.
  • Another participant questions where forces are applied and which deflection is measured, suggesting that a longer green section increases stability.
  • There is a discussion about the forces acting on the beams, with one participant describing a downward force on the central cantilever and a reaction moment that appears to cause an upward force on the side beams.
  • Participants consider how to represent the forces in a free body diagram (FBD), debating whether to model the load as a point force or a distributed load due to the geometry of the cross piece.
  • One participant suggests that the reaction moment from the load on the center beam does not significantly deflect the cross piece but causes the side beams to curl up, leading to a counterclockwise rotation.
  • There is a consensus that a moment will be produced regardless of whether the load is point or distributed, but uncertainty remains about how to accurately represent this in the FBD.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the forces and moments acting on the beams, particularly regarding the representation of loads in the FBD. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the mechanics involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of the system, noting that the size and stiffness of the cross piece relative to the side beams may influence deflection and stability. There are unresolved aspects regarding the assumptions made in modeling the forces and moments.

Kristopher Horn
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Attached is my ANSYS model of a spring made using cantilever beams. In playing around with with different dimensions, I noticed that the longer I made the connecting section (dirty green section) the less of a total deflection there was. Could someone explain to me why this is?

The overall goal is to be able to make this spring deflect a certain distance, but I am having a really tough time getting my math to equal my ANSYS analysis.
 

Attachments

  • Side View.PNG
    Side View.PNG
    37.3 KB · Views: 506
  • 3D view.PNG
    3D view.PNG
    40.2 KB · Views: 491
Engineering news on Phys.org
Where do you apply forces, which deflection do you measure?
A longer green section (to the right in the right picture?) increases the stability of this part a bit. There is a deformation which let's the green section look a bit like "U" (outer sides of U are connected to the blue area) that is part of the spring.
 
mfb said:
Where do you apply forces, which deflection do you measure?
A longer green section (to the right in the right picture?) increases the stability of this part a bit. There is a deformation which let's the green section look a bit like "U" (outer sides of U are connected to the blue area) that is part of the spring.
The force is applied directly on the end of the middle beam ( the red section ) and the defelction is highest at the red section, but what is confusing me is that, in looking the the side view at the longest beam there looks to be a force being applied that pulls the beam down, just like a normal cantilever beam, but there also appears to be a force applied somewhere at the end that is trying to pull the beam up.

So is this why it is increasing the stability of the part?
 
Kristopher Horn said:
The force is applied directly on the end of the middle beam ( the red section ) and the defelction is highest at the red section, but what is confusing me is that, in looking the the side view at the longest beam there looks to be a force being applied that pulls the beam down, just like a normal cantilever beam, but there also appears to be a force applied somewhere at the end that is trying to pull the beam up.

When the force is applied to the red part, that central cantilever is pushed down in response. However, there is a reaction moment which is produced by this same force which acts on the cross-piece. It is the reaction moment, I believe, which is tending to curl the cross-piece in a CCW direction when viewed from the side, making it appear that the side beams are pulling up.
 
SteamKing said:
When the force is applied to the red part, that central cantilever is pushed down in response. However, there is a reaction moment which is produced by this same force which acts on the cross-piece. It is the reaction moment, I believe, which is tending to curl the cross-piece in a CCW direction when viewed from the side, making it appear that the side beams are pulling up.
Ok, that's what I was thinking as well, now how would i represent that in a FBD. Would their be a distributed load on the end of the long beam because the cross piece is rectangular and wider than it is thicker, or would it be that there is just a point force on the very end of the long beam. This is for the force due to the torque.

I tried to assume that it was just a point force, because that makes the most sense to me but I couldn't seem to make the beam bend like it is in the side view. The only other explanation I can come up with is that it should be a distributed load.
 
Kristopher Horn said:
Ok, that's what I was thinking as well, now how would i represent that in a FBD. Would their be a distributed load on the end of the long beam because the cross piece is rectangular and wider than it is thicker, or would it be that there is just a point force on the very end of the long beam. This is for the force due to the torque.

Because of the size of the cross piece relative to the side beams, I think the reaction moment from the load applied to the center beam is not producing much deflection in the center piece itself, but instead the apparent counterclockwise rotation results from the slender side beams curling up where they are attached to the cross piece. The cross piece, by virtue of its size, is much stiffer than the center beam or the two side beams.

As to producing a FBD of this situation, this should not be too complicated depending on what you take to be included in the FBD. The center beam and its applied load can be replaced by a force and moment acting at the connection with the cross piece. In turn, this force and moment can be split and applied to the connections with the cross-piece and each side beam.

I tried to assume that it was just a point force, because that makes the most sense to me but I couldn't seem to make the beam bend like it is in the side view. The only other explanation I can come up with is that it should be a distributed load.

The type of load applied to the center beam is irrelevant w.r.t. the reaction moment on the cross piece. A moment is going to be produced for a point load or a distributed load.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
33
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
12K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K